Homily for the 19th Sunday in Ordinary Time

 

1 Kings 19:4-8

Ephesians 4:30-5:2

John 6:41-51

For the third consecutive week, Holy Mother Church places us in the sixth chapter of the Gospel according to St John, in what many Catholic scholars consider John's Eucharistic passage.  John's Eucharistic detail comes in the 6th Chapter of his Gospel, because it is here that Jesus recounts what the Eucharist really is and what it really means.

The Gospel of John, like the other three Gospels, contains an account of what happened at the Last Supper. In the other three Gospels, however, there is an account of the institution of the Eucharist, and Saint Paul reaffirms that account in 1 Corinthians 11:27-32. Interestingly, John's account of the Last Supper doesn't contain an account of the institution of the Eucharist itself on the first Holy Thursday, but instead it contains this lengthy exposition from Jesus in what we know today as the Sixth chapter of John. It's known as the Bread of Life discourse, and we've just heard in this passage why it's called that. Many Catholic biblical scholars believe that this is John's Eucharistic account, his passing along to us one of the most doctrinally important passages in the entire New Testament.

Jesus makes very clear what he means, and his listeners understood it also, which is why we will hear in a couple of weeks time in the Gospel at Sunday Mass the end of this chapter when so many of the people who are listening to Jesus here say "Lord, this saying is hard and who can hear it." (cf. John 6:60-71) Jesus said it very clearly in the Gospel today in our own hearing. "I am the living bread which came down from Heaven, and if any one eats of this bread he shall live forever, and the bread which I will give for the life of the world is my flesh."

Many of our separated brothers and sisters will take this entire passage of Scripture, indeed the entire 6th chapter of John to mean something purely symbolic. I won't spend time today giving the cliche arguments against that position, I'm going to presume you're familiar with them. If you are not, I will say that even though those arguments are very true, I don't think they're the most effective to prove the point that Jesus wasn't speaking symbolically. The reason that we can tell that Jesus was speaking literally was the reaction of the crowd, many of whom, the larger chapter tells us, had been disciples of Jesus before that day, they understood exactly what he meant, and many of them walked away. 

The reality of the Eucharist is so central to our faith that when he was teaching about it, Jesus was more than willing to lose followers over it, people who probably otherwise would have been fine disciples of the Lord. But the teaching of the Eucharist was too much for them, it was that serious for Jesus. At the end of the chapter we even get a hint that maybe the remaining 12 didn't entirely understand what Jesus meant, because he asked them if they would also go away, and you have to love Peter's response when he said "Lord, where shall we go, you have the words of eternal life." Considering the situation in the Church today, there have been many many times in recent years when I have had to remind myself of Peter's words, I would say that many of us probably have.

Our Lord took the teaching of the Eucharist so seriously that when we look at it in the Sacred Scripture today it takes up an entire chapter of the Bible with him explaining it and explaining it again. If it was serious enough to Jesus to spend that much time on one particular teaching of our faith, if we are going to live the way we are called to live and be like Christ then we need to take the Eucharist as seriously as Jesus did and does.

Some three weeks ago on July 16th, there were two Church documents released on the same day. One of those documents received a whole lot of attention in the Catholic media and it's continuing to receive attention. The other one should have gotten much more attention, because the contents of the second document are far more immediately important for the welfare of our immortal souls. The document that should have gotten far more attention and didn't was a pastoral letter by our own Bishop Richard Stika on the matter of sin and the worthy reception of Holy Communion. The Bishop released it to everyone, and you can find it on our diocesan website, but it didn't get a whole lot of coverage in the media. Because of that, you can be forgiven for not knowing about it, but if you want to see everything the bishop had to say, you can look on the website or you can email me. 

The topic of worthiness to receive Holy Communion is sometimes called Eucharistic cohesion. Those words have been in the Catholic news in recent months because the US Bishops are working on a document about it, but our own Bishop's pastoral letter highlights a number of things about worthiness to receive the Eucharist that Catholics ought to know and about which there should be no argument. The Bishop reminds us that of course no one is truly worthy, but that when we approach the altar of God to receive Holy Communion we should be in a state of grace. Unless we are exceptionally saintly, that means availing ourselves of sacramental confession as often as possible. I often remind myself that among humanity, only the Blessed Mother was immaculately conceived. (In his letter, the bishop recommended confession at least once a month or more).

His Excellency also spoke to the controversial issue of public figures who give grave scandal by making a very public profession of their Catholic faith before the world while supporting, promoting, and even publicly funding the terrible Holocaust of abortion. Bishop Stika very rightly says that those who use their public position to promote abortion "cannot be admitted to Holy Communion." (Pastoral 17)

The Church does not tell us these things in order to be unwelcoming or uncaring. It is for the good and the salvation of our own souls that the Church reminds us of the conditions whereby we can and should receive Holy Communion. St. Paul put it perhaps most bluntly of all when he said that those who receive the Eucharist unworthily "will be guilty of profaning the Body and Blood of the Lord." (cf. 1 Corinthians 11:27).

Jesus tells us that He is the living bread who comes down from Heaven, and that if anyone eats of this bread he will live forever, and the bread that Jesus will give is his flesh. Many of us might have heard of the consistent surveys which tell us that only about 30% of Catholics claim to believe in the real presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist. I have always prayed that those numbers are untrue. It is not unreasonable, however, to say that many more people would believe in the truth of Christ's real presence in the Eucharist if more of the world could see us treating the Eucharist as if the Eucharist is the Second Person of the Trinity, God who is Holy. The Blood shed for us and the Body given up for us. For if we behave in such a way that shows the world that the Eucharist is Christ, we will understand what it means to receive Jesus worthily, and we will all want to do so.

Homily for the Sixth Sunday in Ordinary Time

 

Leviticus 13:1-2

1 Corinthians 10:31-11:1

Mark 1:40-45

"If you wish, you can make me clean." That's what the leper said to Jesus at the beginning of the Gospel today. Some translations render it-I think more accurately- "if you will it, you can make me clean." In this singular moment the leper approached Jesus and completely submitted himself to the will of God, seeming to understand that Jesus could just as well have told him no. We can even see that Jesus had every reason to decide not to heal the man, after all he asked the fellow not to say anything to anyone about what Jesus had done but to show himself to the priest as Moses had prescribed. Of course this man didn't bother to listen to Jesus on that score, the Gospel tells us that he went out and publicized the whole matter.

It's important to remember that by the standards of that day, what Jesus did was remarkable, and not merely because he healed the leper. As we heard in the first reading today from the book of Leviticus, the law as given to Moses was very clear that any person who came down with leprosy-or what we might know today as Hansen's disease- was to be considered unclean, and separated out from the people of God as a whole. 

This seems like a punishment and it seems very harsh, but there was a reason for it. The biblical injunction to separate someone with leprosy away from the children of Israel was a kind of quarantine. In ancient times, they didn't have the more advanced knowledge of germ theory or how disease was transmitted, but they did figure out that it was possible for more people to get leprosy if there was a person with leprosy among them. They were not wrong, because leprosy is a bacterial infection and it can spread from person to person, although we know today that you're more likely to catch leprosy from another leper if you have extensive close contact with them. The ancients were simply aware that this could spread from person to person and they did understand how dangerous that it was. You might remember the story of Saint Damian of Molokai, who was called to care for the lepers in Hawaii and eventually caught the disease himself…

Jesus, however, let it be seen that he touched a leper and healed him. Jesus showed that it is his will to make people whole. Oftentimes this does not necessarily mean physical healing, although it can. More often than not, Jesus seeks to make our souls whole. Sin, along with the emotional scars and daily wear and tear of life in this world can cause our hearts- our souls- to be infected with a kind of spiritual leprosy. In the sight of God- and even sometimes in the sight of the people around us- we are unclean, and if no one else knows it, we do. Just like healing the leper in the Gospel, Jesus wills us to be made clean and he's willing to make it happen if we are willing to come to him.

These preceding months that we have all lived through have helped me understand this story in a way in which we might perhaps not otherwise be able to. We are living in a time when we are told that so many of our neighbors could be unclean and that we need to distance ourselves from them, just as lepers had to do in our Old Testament reading. We can better imagine how the leper who Jesus healed must have felt because now he was free and he was clean and he could be a part of the community again, and the community could embrace him. 

God gives us opportunity to be healed of our spiritual leprosy as well. The first way to do this is to present ourselves for the Sacrament of Confession or Reconciliation. The second way that we can do this is to begin to examine our lives and find out where our weaknesses are, what are the problems in our spiritual immune system that leave us weak and susceptible to the diseases that are sin and spiritual sloth? We can do a daily such examination, and we could commit ourselves to greater prayer, such as time for the Rosary, or the Angelus, or the Liturgy of the Hours. I can speak from both personal experience and the experience of working with others to help them in their faith… If we constantly commit ourselves to improving our prayer life and our personal devotion, these things are the ultimate weapons against sin and sloth, for idle time is the playhouse of the Devil. Rather than have idle time, give it to God. We can all stand to turn off the television or the smartphone and take time to call on the Lord.

Some of us have very busy daily schedules, sometimes things come up that we don't expect and weren't planning on. There are many days when we set aside time for prayer, but things don't work out the way we had planned, and we might think to ourselves "what am I supposed to do?" Even in the most dire and time squeezed-circumstances, most of us can usually make time for the Angelus (or the Regina Caeli in the Easter season), and if all else fails and we're so pressed for time that we can't even take 3 minutes for the Angelus, perhaps we can at least say that beautiful Jesus Prayer every day that is a part of Eastern tradition. "Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner."

Father Patrick, Father Andres, and I and the other deacons are somewhat fortunate in that we are made to go on a retreat every year. This is often a time to rest, but it's also a time to take stock of where our relationship with Christ is in our life and how we can improve it. I know it is that way for me. Not everyone can afford to drop what they're doing and go on retreat, so every year the Church brings the retreat to us. The Holy Season of Lent begins this coming Wednesday. The principles of this great season are prayer, fasting, and almsgiving. Those three principles should apply to our lives all the time, not just for around 40 days every year. However, there is likely not a single one of us who is perfectly living out those pillars of Christian example, so each year the Church gives us an opportunity to step back and be reminded of how we are supposed to live, and ultimately that we are supposed to live for others. We will begin on Ash Wednesday and journey with the Lord to Calvary during that time. The discipline of Lent should be a reminder to us that there is no reward of Heaven without the Cross, and that our sufferings are a part of the life we live for God.

Lent is also an opportunity for us to do as the leper did in the Gospel today, it is a chance for us to stretch out our hands to the Lord Jesus and to request of him "Lord, if you will, make me clean." The difference is that now Jesus won't ask us to keep it a secret, he wants us to tell the whole world so that they will ask him to do the same for them.

Homily for the Sixth Sunday in Ordinary Time

Sirach 15:15-20
1 Corinthians 2:6-10
Matthew 5:17-37

In today's Gospel, Jesus proceeds to remind us of what can only be described in today's culture and society as the hard teachings or the hard sayings of our faith. Many of us can define what mortal sin is because we were taught it in school or in Catechism, but a great many people don't understand where the definitions actually come from. The reality is that much of the definition of what constitutes mortal sin for the Christian-for the practicing Catholic-comes from today's Gospel.

In the first reading from the book of Sirach, we are reminded that we can keep the Commandments. Even though we have all sinned, Scripture repeatedly reminds us that we have the capability to keep God's Commandments in our lives if we are open to the Graces that we need in order to do so. The Bible tells us that the commands of God are not grievous. (cf. 1 John 5:3) It is important to remember that God understands our human weaknesses, He understands that we sin, but that doesn't mean that He's okay with it.

Jesus tells those who are listening to Him, both in His own time, as well as us hearing him two thousand years later through the words of the text, that he did not come to abolish the law, he came to fulfill it. In the Gospel, he doesn't do away with the Commandments of God and tell us we no longer have to obey them, as even some preachers today falsely teach. Instead, Jesus sets an even higher standard for what it means to obey God than many of His listeners had ever heard before. He tells them whoever fails to obey these Commandments, even the least of them-and teaches others to do so-will be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven, but the person will be called greatest who observes the Commandments of God and teaches others to do the same.

Our righteousness, says Jesus, has to surpass that of the Scribes and Pharisees. What does He mean by that? The Scribes and Pharisees had the outward appearance of being followers of the Lord. They not only obeyed the law of Moses, but they obeyed a strict rabbinic code that was designed to help them maintain outward legal purity. What this meant in reality was that many of the Pharisees were following the law of God in an outward way, but within their hearts they were anything but pure.

Jesus tells us that not only are we to avoid murder, but we are even to avoid anger with our brother-our neighbor. What Jesus means by this is that we cannot hang on to our anger or sore feelings, as scripture tells us, "do not let the sun go down on your wrath." if we do hang on to our anger, Jesus says that we are liable to judgment in just the same way as if we had killed that person. If we call a brother a fool, discounting their value as a human being, we are liable to the fires of Hell, Jesus says. Do we have something against another person, do we have something we need to settle? Jesus says we shouldn't offer sacrifice to God until we settle our issues with those around us. As far as practical application, that ideally means that we should settle our grudges and our issues with others before we come to the house of God for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

When Jesus reminds us of the command of God not to commit adultery, he doesn't simply restate the law, and he certainly doesn't do away with it, as some misguided people would have us believe. Instead, Jesus tells us that we are guilty of adultery if we so much as lust after another person. We are guilty if we dwell on the sinful thought, not merely if we commit the act itself. Jesus raises the bar to a level that many in our society today might say that they find difficult to live out. The temptation to the sins of the flesh are everywhere to be found in our culture today, and because of the internet they are so easily accessible, when for centuries they were hidden from the view of the wider society. Yet Jesus asks us to live a life of chastity according to our state in life.

Jesus' repeated command in the Gospels against divorce and remarriage have been virtually overlooked by the entire Protestant world, and many Catholics only come in contact with this vital teaching about sacramental Matrimony when they come to the Church seeking to be reconciled and petitioning for a declaration of nullity. (Mind you, in no way am I saying that someone shouldn't do that if they have been in an invalid marital situation-that's why we have the annulment process-but it is terribly sad that for many people, the Church's teaching on the nature of marriage is not something they have been taught or fully confronted for one reason or another until they come to the Church needing to have the sacramental validity of a previous marital situation clarified). Jesus raises the bar of Holy Matrimony, telling us that Matrimony- sacred marriage- is between one man and one woman for life. Civil divorce does not bring an end to the Sacrament of Matrimony, and the Church clearly teaches us that civil divorce should only be used as a last resort or when it is the only option (cf. CCC 2382-2386), never as a solution to the problems that most married people confront in married life.

Considering all that Jesus tells us in the Gospel that is expected of those who follow him, and understanding the way that Jesus asks us to live in the world, there are many people who don't even try, they simply don't think it's possible to live in the way that Jesus tells us in the Gospel that we must live. Many people, and indeed many ecclesial communities, will tell us that they are all about living out the compassion of Christ, but the moral standards that he asks of us are another matter. Many people have come to believe a false theology that says that they can be saved regardless of what they do or how they act because at one time they made a sincere commitment to Jesus Christ. Those good people have it wrong… it is precisely because we make a commitment to Jesus Christ that we are expected to live the way that he has told us he wants his followers to live.

It is easy for any other member of the clergy to share the message of today's Gospel. It is quite another thing to live that Gospel out. How can we be expected to live in this way that Jesus describes here, in today's society and culture? there is only one way, and that is to allow ourselves to be open to God's grace in our lives to give us the help we need to live the life that Christ expects of us. We can be open to God's Grace by going to regular confession, and confessing our sins, we can live a fully sacramental life, we can be open to God's Grace by praying for strength to overcome our weaknesses and sins.

If we truly want a relationship with Jesus Christ, that involves accepting his Lordship over all things, including our life, and that means praying daily for God to give you the Graces you need through the sacraments. God's commands are not grievous, and he gives us the means before our very eyes in the Sacraments.

If we want to be as holy as Christ wishes us to be, we need to begin living a sacramental life, a life of prayer according to our station in life. If we are open to God's mercy and to his Grace, if we are willing to receive the gifts that he has for us, he can give us the grace to live exactly how he expects all of us to live, and to obey the moral law that he set down for all of us.

If we are truly open to a relationship with Jesus Christ, he will give us the strength we need to live the Gospel each and every day, in every aspect of our lives, including the strength to keep His Commandments.

Homily for the 26th Sunday in Ordinary Time

Amos 6:1A, 4-7
1 Timothy 6:11-16 
Luke 16:19-31


We are not told that the rich man in Jesus’ parable didn’t believe in God, or that he lacked faith, or that he didn’t observe the letter of the law of Moses himself. What we do learn about the rich man is that he has one of the worst problems that any professing believer in God, any professing Christian today can have, and that is the problem of indifference. The rich man was obviously indifferent to the plight of Lazarus who was at his gate, but even more, it is clear that while he was alive, this man had no fear of God. Why can we say that? He saw Lazarus all the time out at the entrance to his property, and he chose to ignore the situation. This is not only an illustration to us from Jesus that we should not ignore the poor and the helpless and should be keen to lend them a hand up, it also represents a flagrant violation of repeated commands of God not to ignore the cry of the poor.



Indifference may be the greatest tool of Satan to bring the greatest number of people into Hell. The Devil isn't worried about the hardened sinner, the unrepentant murderer, the unrepentant adulterer, the unrepentant criminal, the atheist who violently renounces the faith (out of spite against God), a phenomenon we see more and more of today. Satan already has these people, those who have turned away from God in a very public way. He doesn't have to make any effort to try to get them, Jesus is the one who gave his all to bring those people to repentance, and it is the Lord who makes the effort to pursue the hardened sinner. Instead, the Devil has to make an effort to lure the decent and the reasonable people into the Kingdom of Darkness, and indifference is how he does it. The rich man in Jesus's parable is a classic example of how indifference can ultimately send someone to Hell.



Nowhere are we told that the rich man was a personally bad individual, or that he treated members of his own family or his friends with such a lack of care or concern. We are told, however, that while he was eating and drinking well, and while he was well clothed and all of his needs were provided for, there was a need in front of him, a man who was his neighbor. To Lazarus and to his needs, the rich man was indifferent.



Because this was a parable of Jesus, we aren't told much about the rich man's personal life. However, because of the way things worked in 1st Century Palestine, we could probably glean that such a rich man was a Jewish person who was probably at least outwardly observant. That could mean that he went to the synagogue or to the Temple on a regular basis, and certainly for Holy Days and the Sabbath. He would certainly have paid his Temple tax and given the expected alms to the poor, and likely a sizable donation to the Temple treasury. His friends and family likely would not have seen him as anything other than "a good Jew," because that would have been what was accepted in that day and time for someone of that kind of status.


But as men see on the outward appearance, God sees on the heart (cf. 1 Samuel 16:7), and more than anything else it was the rich man's indifference to Lazarus and to the sin of failing to love his neighbor as himself which is what sent the rich man to Hell. (A note here… some of you may remember that a couple of years ago we had Father Stephen Imbarrato here, and he gave a wonderful Parish mission. In one of his talks he suggested that the rich man in the Gospel today might be in purgatory. I'm going to respectfully disagree with him, every decent commentary I have found places the rich man in Hell).


It should stand as a warning to all of us. God does not wish to send anyone to Hell, even Sacred Scripture tells us that much. Going to Hell is not in God's will for you, it's not in God's will for me, and despite what some of our ultra-Calvinist friends may think, it's not in God's will for anyone's life. (cf. 2 Peter 3:9) But God is both a wonderful father and wonderful friend, he doesn't force anyone to love him and he doesn't force anyone to keep His commandments… however, we are repeatedly warned that there are consequences if we don't keep His commandments. These are not consequences that he heaps upon us out of vengeance, but the consequences of failing to follow God are the results of the choices we face in life and the choices we make. The most dangerous choice of all is the choice of indifference. Indifference to our sins, yes, but also indifference to the things of God and to the plan of God.


God created us, and God loves us. He loves us enough to respect the choices that we make. If we choose to live a life without God (something that is possible to do even if you put up the front of coming to Mass on Sunday), we are the ones who have made the choice, and we've made it for eternity.


How can we make the right choice? We have the tools in front of us, we have the teachings of the Church, we have Sacred Scripture, and we not only have the Sacraments, but if we want to be right with God, and if we choose to accept the Graces that God wants to give us through the Sacraments, He will give us the Graces to live the kind of life that he expects of us to live (and part of that means not being afraid of the Sacrament of Reconciliation, God loves a repentant sinner).



But we can make the wrong choice as well, and that's entirely up to us. We can choose to be overly concerned with the things of this world, with our own self-enrichment, with our own pleasure and the things which please us. We have the choice to concern ourselves with getting by from day-to-day in this world with little concern for the next. So many people do as Saint Paul described, they have the form of religion, but deny the power thereof (cf. 2 Timothy 3:1-5).


 The Holy Spirit has given us everything we need to succeed in the Christian Life and to win the race. Do we avail ourselves of those tools? Not only coming to Holy Mass on Sunday but also on holy days of obligation? Are we people of Prayer? Do we pray the Rosary? Do we pray the Liturgy of the Hours? Do we pray the traditional prayers of the Church? Do we remember those who have asked us to pray for them? Do we read our Bibles? Study our Catechism? Do we make an active effort for intimacy with God because we love him?


The rich man asked Abraham to go to his brothers and warn them of the torments of an eternity without God, and Abraham reminded him that they had all they needed in this life right now to avoid the torments of Hell. "They have Moses and the Prophets, let them look to them." "But if only they could see you, Father Abraham and you warn them, they will believe."


"If they will not believe Moses and the prophets, neither will they believe if someone should rise from the dead." Someone did rise from the dead, that is why we are here, and we have two thousand years of the Church's Magisterium to guide us. Don't be like the rich man or his brothers...

Bishop Tobin is Right

Bishop Thomas Tobin

Recently, Bishop Thomas Tobin of Providence, Rhode Island landed himself in hot water with many in the popular culture with this Tweet over this past weekend about some...cultural events...taking place in many parts of the country during the month of June.

A reminder that Catholics should not support or attend LGBTQ “Pride Month” events held in June. They promote a culture and encourage activities that are contrary to Catholic faith and morals. They are especially harmful for children.

— Bishop Thomas Tobin (@ThomasJTobin1) June 1, 2019

Immediately the wolves of our culture came to denounce Tobin for "spreading hate," as they usually do to any bishop, priest, or deacon who speaks out about the moral law, and some even said that he was wrong to say anything because his words would encourage hatred against the "gay community." Even some members of the clergy have gotten in on the act, trying to say on social media that what Bishop Tobin said was not compassionate.

But is the Bishop wrong? Firstly, what is the Church's official statement of its own teaching on this matter? The Catechism of the Catholic Church makes it as clear as possible for us:

2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered." They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. They do not choose their homosexual condition; for most of them it is a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

The Church holds, then, that while someone's proclivity to attraction of people of the same sex is not, in and of itself, a sin, that homosexual activity is a sin. The Church calls on us to treat homosexual persons with "respect, compassion, and sensitivity," but the Church is quite clear that this compassion does not extend to acceptance of sinful behavior, and indeed that would not be compassionate at all-it could endanger many souls.

Bishop Tobin also said that that Catholics should not attend events which celebrate "Pride Month." No doubt, some readers will say "but Deacon, doesn't the Catechism say that we should treat gay people with 'respect, compassion, and sensitivity,' so shouldn't we go all out and celebrate Pride Month to support them?


 



Are you also going on public marches or attending public events to support those who have a proclivity to adultery or fornication? Would you do such a thing? If you would, I would question any claim you might make to practice bona fide Christianity. Yes, we are all sinners, but we are still called to avoid sin and the near occasion of sin. Furthermore, if we attend events which promote sin, we are giving our approval to the sin by our presence there, and if we do not approve, we will have given scandal to many other believers by the appearance of giving public approbation to grave sin. At the very least, you are saying you are proud of your concupiscence and that of others. "YAY, I am proud of my human proclivity to potentially commit sin and do evil in the sight of God!"

Sacred Scripture certainly backs up what Bishop Tobin is trying to say:

"Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither the immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God." -1 Corinthians 6:9-10

What reason would anyone have to attend a rally that supports and promotes homosexual acts and faux "marriage" other than to support those acts yourself? If you don't, why would you attend an event where they do? If you would not support other deadly sins, you shouldn't support "Pride Month" either.

Some on social media are saying that Bishop Tobin "backed down" because of this statement from the Diocese of Providence:

.

A close reading of this statement shows us, however, that Bishop Tobin isn't backing down at all. He is more effectively stating Catholic teaching:

I regret that my comments yesterday about Pride Month have turned out to be so controversial in our community, and offensive to some, especially the gay community. That certainly was not my intention, but I understand why a good number of individuals have taken offense. I also acknowledge and appreciate the widespread support I have received on this matter.

 The Catholic Church has respect and love for members of the gay community, as do I. Individuals with same-sex attraction are beloved children of God and our brothers and sisters. 

 As a Catholic Bishop, however, my obligation before God is to lead the faithful entrusted to my care and to teach the faith, clearly and compassionately, even on very difficult and sensitive issues. That is what I have always tried to do – on a variety of issues – and I will continue doing so as contemporary issues arise.

 In other words, Bishop Tobin is saying "I love you, what I said was true." Indeed, he reiterated to the news media that he stands by his statement.

One of the difficulties with Twitter is that you have so little space in which to express what you are trying to get across to others. Twitter has helped to reduce our society to one in which many people take the entirety of what others say by a few characters.

It is for this reason that I personally do not recommend the use of Twitter as a means of social communication for my brother clerics. When the time comes to address controversial social and moral issues, and one feels the need to address them online (as indeed I have done in this post), other means of internet communication such as Facebook, MeWe, or blogs exist so that we may say all that needs to be said, all that the Holy Spirit might place upon our hearts. 

I would humbly recommend to Bishop Tobin that he consider one of those alternatives when the time comes, as it inevitably does in the time in which we live, to address the state of our society on internet-based social media.

Even though other means might have been better means to convey the message, what Bishop Tobin said is true. "Gay Pride" events promote grave sin. Catholics concerned for the good of their souls and the souls of others should not attend or promote them.